I am for a free and open internet with minimal censorship other than what an individual chooses for his/her own settings.
If our gov't does anything with it, it should be to make sure that ISPs honestly represent services (mine lied), make it clear whom their regulatory oversight authority is and how to report, also that ISPs must have a few low cost options for DSL service, and must offer stand alone DSL (that has already been decided in court vs ATT&T in the USA).
No net metering should be permitted and ISPs should be responsible financially to maintain promised upload and down load speeds.
Ken_19: This questionnaire is designed to see how many poll takers also think before responding.
NO, keep the internet, it facilitates a lot of useful usage, primarily in communication. If leaders of nations are facing problems connected or partly caused by internet, it's because they lack the anticipation of what internet could provoke. Internet has depassed it's possitive utility than negativity, Surgeons could now operate from a distance, just to cite one,,, It's the users that should adopt the correct usage of it, but well, it was always like that not only on internet, we deturn something good to something destructive,,,cheers,,,
As some countries have already learned, disconnecting from the Internet is virtually (no pun intended) impossible. As long as there is electricity, which is as long as someone has a car battery, or sunlight, or a breeze or running water to make electric with, someone will always have Internet. Of course since having Internet doesn't cost a country money and it will be there even if one country isn't the concept of somehow saving money by doing the impossible is ludicrous.
Sadly only about 1/3 of the 22 responding were honest enough to say they didn't understand the question. Which makes sense because it was a trick nonsense question. Then 1/3 argued yes save the money, while the other 1/3 inflated with horror at the very suggestion of losing their Internet in spite of the lack of a connection between their countries budget and the Internet.
As some countries have already learned, disconnecting from the Internet is virtually (no pun intended) impossible. As long as there is electricity, which is as long as someone has a car battery, or sunlight, or a breeze or running water to make electric with, someone will always have Internet. Of course since having Internet doesn't cost a country money and it will be there even if one country isn't the concept of somehow saving money by doing the impossible is ludicrous.
Sadly only about 1/3 of the 22 responding were honest enough to say they didn't understand the question. Which makes sense because it was a trick nonsense question. Then 1/3 argued yes save the money, while the other 1/3 inflated with horror at the very suggestion of losing their Internet in spite of the lack of a connection between their countries budget and the Internet.
Yes, i think get your point now,, even middle east countries overflowing with oil might even DONT need them to have electricity and by extension,,, no cost internet connection.
It was indeed a tricky question (and highly technical) coming from someone whose country don't cater much about clean energy, solar, wind, sea current, and geothermal, hydro,, etc,,,
I think indeed, few give a thought to it,, the comments prove that not so many got it clearly, and i'm among !!! I now think, it was more of a possible low cost electricity and by extension to produce almost free internet connections but still, they need investments as well as additional research and perfection,, there's a complicated technique behind,, cheers too for a cleaner environment ,,,
tomcatwarneOcean City, Plumouth, Devon, England UK17,106 posts
Babettefr: Yes, i think get your point now,, even middle east countries overflowing with oil might even DONT need them to have electricity and by extension,,, no cost internet connection.
It was indeed a tricky question (and highly technical) coming from someone whose country don't cater much about clean energy, solar, wind, sea current, and geothermal, hydro,, etc,,,
I think indeed, few give a thought to it,, the comments prove that not so many got it clearly, and i'm among !!! I now think, it was more of a possible low cost electricity and by extension to produce almost free internet connections but still, they need investments as well as additional research and perfection,, there's a complicated technique behind,, cheers too for a cleaner environment ,,,
The internet is still far to expensive and exploited as communications are.
There are many wi fis popping up around all countries, many of them free. You can find out where these are on the internet. Many of our buses have free wifis on, and you can amplify more distant signals with a Cantenna made at home or shop built, so free internet access is possible.
tomcatwarne: The internet is still far to expensive and exploited as communications are.
There are many wi fis popping up around all countries, many of them free. You can find out where these are on the internet. Many of our buses have free wifis on, and you can amplify more distant signals with a Cantenna made at home or shop built, so free internet access is possible.
Yes, tom,, Just the imagination of how we could make it cheap,, the potentials of other countries having all those natural capacity to acceed to natural electricity could be advantageous to their local economy,,but then it's another story/thread to exploit ,,
Yes, even in the Phils. where public transport is still widely needed/utilized, new and modern buses now have free wifis on board, even passenger liner ships, but it deosn't arrive there without technical know how.
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
Do you believe your country should save money by dropping it's Internet connections?(Vote Below)
to see how many poll takers also
think before responding.